By Pervez Hoodbhoy
Published: May 6, 2012

The writer teaches physics and political science at LUMS. He holds a doctorate in physics from MIT

Pakistan’s current and aspiring political leaders can rarely give a public speech these days without invoking ghairat (honour) in some shape or form. Rather than present plans for reducing unemployment or providing electricity, they talk about shame and honour. The ultimate insult ‘bayghairat’ (without honour) is sometimes hurled onto an opponent. Adrenalin levels shoot even higher when they speak of America and “breaking the chains of slavery”. The more morally and intellectually bankrupt a leader, the louder he thunders about qaumi ghairat (national honour).

This time-tested formula has worked wherever a people have been dispirited and dejected. For example, Hitler’s meteoric rise to power, culminating in the most destructive war of history, came from appealing to the collective ghairat of the German nation and to the alleged cowardice and corruption of its rulers.

Hitler’s famous Munich beer hall speeches were followed up in Mein Kampf: “A nation without honour will sooner or later lose its freedom and independence… a generation of poltroons is not entitled to freedom. He who would be a slave cannot have honour.” Translated into Urdu, these lines are exactly what one hears on TV these days from men like Imran Khan and Hamid Gul.

The real implication of ghairat hit me for the first time some twenty years ago. A group of seven senior military officers, then studying operational matters at the National Defence College, had come to meet me at the physics department of Quaid-i-Azam University. Nuclear weapons were new at that time and, quite sensibly, they were keen to learn technical details from every available source. Although Pakistan did not officially acknowledge possessing such weapons then, the process of inducting them into the forces had already begun.

We had a good discussion on everything from blast radii and firestorms to electronic locks and PALS (Permissive Action Links). The officers took copious notes and appeared satisfied. As they prepared to leave I asked what circumstances, in their opinion,would warrant the use of nuclear weapons by Pakistan.

After some reflection one officer spoke up: “Professor,” he assured me, “they shall be used only defensively if at all, and only if the Pakistan Army faces defeat. We cannot allow ourselves to be dishonoured.” Around the table, heads nodded in agreement. Significantly, the calculus of destruction — that cities would be obliterated on both sides — was not what mattered. Ghairat did.

The same question put to Indian military officers would probably elicit the same answer. Historically, honour has driven armies to fight battles. Even as the officer spoke, my thoughts wandered to The Charge of the Light Brigade. During the Crimean War of 1854, wave after wave of honour-charged British soldiers rode their horses into the mouths of Russian guns which, of course, promptly mowed them down. Tennyson later immortalised the slain men in his famous poem: “All the world wonder’d. Honour the charge they made! Honour the Light Brigade.”

The honour-driven Japanese samurai were even more extreme. As agents for various lords, shoguns, and the Emperor, their duties involved keeping peasants in line as well as fighting wars. Honest and dedicated, they were a model for ordinary Japanese. When a samurai lost honour, he could save his dignity only through hara-kiri (cutting open his belly).The last days of World War II turned samurais into suicide bombers who (unsuccessfully) flew planes into US aircraft carriers. Their actions ultimately brought the atom bomb to Japan.

A curse upon honour! It brings to a nation nought but militarisation, conquest, conflict, and the pain of war. On the other hand, where reason has defeated honour, the results have been spectacular. For example, in the ashes of WW II lay two thoroughly defeated and dishonoured nations: Germany and Japan. Had they remained stubbornly defiant, they would still be squatting there today. But, overcoming pride and honour, the vanquished accepted defeat and made peace with the victors. Today they are among the most advanced of nations, and major aid donors to Pakistan.

Vietnam is another amazing example. After 20 bitter years of war it won but was devastated. American B-52s had flattened its cities, while napalm and Agent Orange had devastated its villages and jungles. Yet, tossing aside honour and vengeance, Vietnam today reaches out to its former tormentors and invites their companies and investment. It is a country with a future.
Compare the bayghairat Vietnamese to Afghanistan’s ghairat-obsessed people. Proud and unconquerable, they had earlier fought off the British and the Soviets; soon the Americans will too be gone. But, post-2014, what awaits them? Only more blood and sorrow, and yet another civil war.
Anthropologists tell us that honour is a concept that originated in herding societies because a tribal man’s animals and women were protected from other tribesmen by a code of honour. But then, as tribes amalgamated and merged into the larger stream of civilisation, differing notions of honour led to strife. Traditional societies of the present era, in which honour plays a larger role, are relatively more violent than modern ones. The ease with which men kill their wives and daughters for sexual misconduct is but one example; there are scores of others.

Still, there are some in the West (see Sacred tribal values by J Gold & C Kammen, 1998), as well as here in Pakistan, who call for a return to tribal values. Perhaps one must hear them sympathetically because not all of what they say is bad. They hark back to the days when life was simple, good could easily be separated from bad, there was a spirit of community, and science had not made us into “One Dimensional Man” (in the words of the German philosopher Herbert Marcuse). They are nostalgic about what the world looked like centuries ago, all without having seen it or being aware of the downsides. Alas, they imagine false utopias.

A culture of honour is fine for the herders of goats and camels, or those who live in unpoliceable mountainous areas. But a culture of honour is disastrous for us, a nuclear-armed nation of 180 million people who want jobs, electricity, and the fruits of modernity.So, to hell with the fakery of meaningless honour! Instead, let us create a culture of law and reason, of compassion and tolerance. Let us become — proudly — bayghairat.

-The Express Tribune

May 8, 2012
By Talat Masood

The annual Youm-e-Shuhada (Martyrs’ Day) ceremony, held on April 30 at the General Head Quarters, was impressive and solemn, paying homage to our brave soldiers who laid their lives in defence of the country. It was also an occasion that provided moral and emotional support to those who have lost their near and dear ones. General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani deserves credit for creating this tradition by institutionalising the event.

Recent tragic incidents, especially Siachen and Salala, cast a deep shadow on this year’s function. These two episodes were also a reminder of Pakistan’s crisis-ridden relationships with India and the US.

Martyrs’ day reminds us that the sacrifices by our soldiers and civilians cannot be wasted by our misdeeds and weaknesses elsewhere. It was, perhaps, for this reason that the chief of army staff used the occasion to convey some meaningful and nuanced messages. His categorical support for democracy was reassuring, especially at a time when the civilian government is shaky and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani is fighting a political battle of survival against a court judgment. Despite the shabby state of affairs, international and domestic conditions have restrained the army from taking power directly. Politically, for the army, taking power again makes little sense as the country is becoming increasingly ungovernable and full of risks for it. Although many people feel frustrated with poor governance and yearn for a return to military rule, the army may think otherwise given its own political interests.

General Kayani also remarked that all institutions should remain within their constitutional limits. This was significant and ironic, considering how the army had crossed constitutional red lines on several occasions in the past. Staying within boundaries applies to all institutions including the judiciary. In its sincere effort in trying to get rid of the corrupt and rent-seeking practices of certain politicians and bureaucrats, the judiciary, at times, tends to usurp the powers of the executive. Clearly, the status of the higher judiciary gives it a certain amount of immunity. But when it goes too far to impose its authority in every field of the executive it could, inadvertently, and even in good faith, abuse our democratic system. All institutions need to calibrate their actions within their constitutional mandate or they risk creating an impression that they believe that ends justify the means. On the contrary, ends and means should both be within the ambit of the law.

Pakistan’s central issue revolves around accountability and balance of power within institutions. By repeatedly engaging in corruption, failing to provide even the basics of governance and avoiding accountability, the government has brought out the worst in our individual leaders and institutions. Politicians are elected to lead and to stand for the rule of law. The executive’s dismal performance has meant an abject failure of leadership. There is no respect for the social contract that is supposed to exist between the state and the individual. Political parties are being used to keep their leaders in power instead of solving the country’s problems. There is a need to call the whole system back to some sort of order.

The question then arises: is the opposition party, the PML-N, capable of providing an alternative political and strategic paradigm? Or, can Imran Khan harness a movement to build Pakistan anew? At this time, Imran has constructed a platform that touches many populist buttons and has developed a fairly impressive following. He has been staying out of elections and is advising the PML-N and other political parties to resign from parliament. This move could have unintended consequences. Launching anti-government demonstrations in the form of public rallies against the government is an acceptable practice even in mature democracies but operating outside the loop could undermine the very system that Imran himself would need if and when he came to power. He is a rejectionist and is justified in his opposition to politics that is hierarchical and restricted to certain families. But besides projecting the ugly side of opponents, it is important that he looks at the broader picture, works toward institutional balance and harnesses forces that can tackle major issues confronting the country. In short, only that party which reinvents Pakistan for the 21st century will succeed. For this, it must develop a working consensus among major institutions and harness the forces of modernisation. Clearly, it is democracy’s moment that our leaders have to seize and build on. The consequences of failure could be horrendous, leading to anarchy and the country ending up with some form of authoritarian religious or military regime.

-The Express Tribune

Kamila Hyat
Thursday, May 10, 2012


The writer is a freelance columnist and former newspaper editor

Talk of long marches and vociferous slogans continue to be raised in the National Assembly, demanding that the prime minister step down. The PML-N insists it must defend the judiciary; there has been mention of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf joining forces with it, and altering the existing shape of our political reality.

These parties of course raise points that are not entirely invalid. While the legalities are far from clear, the sheer immorality of our political system is frightening to witness. Because of it we have landed ourselves in a quagmire of complications, from which there appears to be no escape. This is not a situation any nation would want to be in. But even so, the question arises if there are other issues which should be placed higher up the list of priorities by political parties.

It seems strange for political parties to be so concerned about saving the judiciary and it’s dignity but not bothered at all by the plight of millions of people in the country who are barely able to survive.

While we hear rhetoric about inflation and related issues almost every day, the fact that so many people are quite literally at a point of starvation does not seem to register. While suicides caused by poverty are reported from time to time, the situation of the people who go on with life but wage a daily battle to put even the most meagre meal on the table is rarely heard about.

No one speaks out for them. Surely political parties who express so much concern about the people of our country should be endeavouring to gather them all together and lead marches and rallies which draw attention to their condition.

It should not be very hard to bring these people together. All that is required is the leadership to do so and a belief among people that these leaders genuinely care for them rather than their own interests.

The tragedy of our country is that at the moment there seems to be no political organisation which can bring the people together and persuade them to take a lead in an attempt to create a better future for themselves and for their children.

Most people, when spoken to, refer to all the major political parties with a similar lack of conviction that they are really out there to bring any lasting change.This holds true even for those who raise the most vociferous cries in the name of the masses. The response of the people to them has however been rather half-hearted.

There is no evidence that they see them as real alternatives to the political set up that exists now. The views of these people are of course based on logic.As has been the case through most of our history, they know where their interests lie, even if their opinions have not always been respected.

In the times we live in today with the costs of nearly everything required for life rising sharply and relentlessly the people need a force which can guide them towards change.So far no economic formulas to achieve this have been put forward by any party. The focus appears to be simply on bringing down the present government – or at least its prime minister.

What this would achieve is far from clear. What we really need is alternatives and a vision of what can be made possible in a country where hope is dying rapidly and the small flickers of light that people once saw before them are being snuffed out.

There is a requirement for radical change. Even the army chief has admitted to this, speaking at Skardu after visiting the site of the recent glacier tragedy which killed a whole battalion, emphasising on the need to spend more in development and to work towards better ties with India, so that resources can be freed for this.

It is unfortunate the COAS’s acknowledgement of a need for change, a need to look beyond the national security paradigm has not been picked up on by the political parties.

Of the problems we face now, the question of what happens to the PM is somewhat immaterial. Of course we need an adherence to the Constitution, of course we need institutional harmony with each body playing a part in this and acting within the boundaries laid out for it and of course we need an end to corruption and misgovernance.

But even more than that we need parties to focus more on the issues that directly affect the lives of the people and not leave them trapped in a pit down which no rope leads. That rope can be lowered down only by a party that truly cares, is willing to go beyond attacks on the existing set-up and instead ensure it falls at the next election by offering people real options that can lead to change.

Those options are simply not visible to the people at the moment, who hear only loud – and not always inaccurate – criticism of the present government but little detail on what kind of order would replace it or how their own lives could change under such an order.

Rather than the confrontational warnings of a march on Islamabad and the equally senseless retaliatory threats of a rally at Raiwind, we need parties to spell out quite how they will usher in change.

In times as desperate as ours, the fashionably alliterated manifestos put down before us are not enough. We need something more meaningful; something more substantial.What the people expect from political parties is to lay out a map leading towards the future. This map must include suggestions, proposals and solid promises as to how change is to be achieved; education provided to everyone, a means of livelihood offered to every family and means found to put food on empty tables.

Until this happens, talks of ‘revolution’ or a ‘tsunami’ are worth nothing at all.People appear to have recognised this already. They also see no leader on the horizon who is worth following.And this is perhaps why we are watching our country disintegrate right before us without so much as a whimper being heard even as loud bellowing of other kinds fills the air.

Email: kamilahyat@hotmail.com

-The News

May 11, 2012
By: Mohammad Jamil
Exclusive Article

It was a sad day, Wednesday, when the Punjab Assembly unanimously passed separate resolutions calling for the restoration of provincial status of Bahawalpur and the creation of a new province of Janoobi Punjab. The resolutions demanded the immediate constitution a national commission to work out the details of carving out these federating units. The resolutions were passed in a special session by members from both sides of the divide. Earlier, the PPP had passed a resolution in the National Assembly for creating a new province comprising southern Punjab with a view to making a dent in PML-N’s power base. After setback in bye-elections in southern Punjab, PML-N local leaders suggested to its leadership to support the demand for a province. It was to win over the people there that the Punjab Law Minister tabled the resolutions. The moves both the PPP and the PML-N appear rather deceptive. Had they been serious they would have adopted the modalities enshrined in the Constitution instead of passing non-binding resolutions.

First of all, both Houses of Parliament have to pass a constitutional amendment with a two-thirds majority for creating an additional province. Then the respective province has to pass a bill for the creation of the new province with a two-thirds majority.

But is this the right time for an exercise of nature when the country faces threats to its security? Yes, there has been unequal development of the provinces as well as in different regions of provinces. But instead of focusing on developing the neglected regions, politicos are following the course which will further exacerbate the existing chasms in the society. With their no-holds-barred partisan politics, they in fact are fuelling the sentiments of parochialism, ethnicity and discord. It is a repellent scenario that in their heated discourse these days, they are talking of everything on earth except what they should be doing to redress the wrongs of the past.

They are pursuing self-serving and self-perpetuating politics zealously, quite unmindful of its disastrous consequences. The kind of fragmentation blighting the nation today was never ever witnessed before in the 65 years of our history. It stands deeply divided virtually on every issue, fractured by ideological and political divisions. Parochial, ethnic, religious, sectarian and confessional disputes are playing havoc with the solidarity and cohesion that are the hallmark of a successful nation.

Unfortunately, the media is also behaving in a fashion, which is not always conducive to forging unity. Certain media houses, in the race for presenting alarming new to catch the attention of the audience and financial gains, seem to have surrendered professional objectivity And talk shows in particular have become the forums for airing and fanning dissensions. Instead of inviting knowledgeable and erudite panelists to analyse the issues objectively and present solutions, the anchors bring up the usual fossils that have nothing worthwhile to offer except slogans they are adept in. Nowhere in the world do the media outlets offer freely such a space to the declared secessionists and separatists to propagate their anti-state ideologies. Not even the media networks of the entrenched democratic orders go to the extent that ours do.

Whereas the lack of socio-economic justice creates contradictions that over time become irreconcilable, the sentiments of parochialism and separatism too have much to do with these economic ailments as well as feelings of deprivation. The people may be reeling under crushing poverty, squalor, disease and want, but with our political leaders are at loggerheads with each other trying to run down national institutions to further their political agendas, nothing better could be expected.

Unfortunately, our leaders do not have the vision for addressing the ravaging economic woes of the people and pulling the country out of the morass. These leaders mostly come from the nation’s traditionally privileged coterie of the landed classes, who have either no clue to setting things right or are just not bothered about it. Some, including industrial barons, have their interests abroad where they own businesses, grand palaces and luxurious mansions. They descend here only to do their petty politicking and power politics. They would be least pushed about the people’s miseries or whether the country is being pushed by their policies to the brink of disaster.

For over six decades, the profligacy of our the ruling classes and the politics of power and pelf have brought the country to economic, political and moral ruin. The state apparatus has become victim to personalized whims and self-aggrandizement, and failed to convert the idealism of the Founding Fathers into a concrete reality. The tragedy is that political as well as religious parties have failed to inspire the people due to their wayward and dogmatic approaches.

The writer is a senior journalist and freelance columnist.

Email: mjamil1938@hotmail.com

May 13, 2012
By Farhan Bokhari

As Pakistan’s ruling elite braces for the country’s next parliamentary elections, their penchant for debating futile issues is unending.

One such matter is that of carving out new provinces across the country. For President Asif Ali Zardari, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and their ruling Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), creating a new province in the southern parts of Punjab will be a definite vote earner.

In the past week, though, the opposition Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif also jumped into the fray as it passed a resolution in the provincial legislature of Punjab to create not one but two new provinces. For a country as vast and as populated as Pakistan, there is indeed merit in creating new provinces.

Yet, the debate coming from the PPP and the PML-N appears to be largely an attempt to upstage each other and win votes. Where is the zealous determination to improve lives of ordinary Pakistanis? To that compelling question, there are just no answers at the moment.
Indeed, there is a danger that new provinces will add to the cost of running Pakistan’s government as new ruling structures are created. Pakistan’s history is also riddled with examples of provincial governments becoming spendthrifts and running huge debts for reasons that have much to do with seeking cheap popularity.

Gimmicks of such kind, and they are indeed gimmicks, may work in the short haul during an election, but the reality on the horizon will quickly dawn upon Pakistanis. Without an aggressive push to reform Pakistan, ventures such as carving out a new province will only be a further exercise in futility.

If the public good was indeed the most pressing issue, Pakistanis must urge their rulers to reform the existing structures of government. Across the country, the most fundamental issues ranging from education to health care and personal security, all suffer from deep neglect. This neglect has only deepened in the past four years as Pakistanis have suffered from ever-growing electricity shortages, a declining quality of health care and public education.

The standard excuse from many in the ruling structure is indeed Pakistan’s sorry past. “It’s all because of the rulers before our time.” This line has become a never ending ‘official argument’ in the ongoing debate, and yet, this line alone doesn’t make sense. Going forward, Pakistanis will suffer endlessly and perhaps even more than today, for as long as the country is in the hands of the present political structure.

Military rule

The time has now come for Pakistanis to firmly reject gimmicks such as the creation of new provinces and demand fundamental rights. In the months leading up to the elections, they will have plenty of scope to register their protests in ways ranging from boycotting of political gatherings to protesting for their rights on the streets. Opposition political groups outside the ruling structure will also have more opportunities to stage large-scale protests in order to put pressure on the rulers.

At the same time, there are also stakes involved for Pakistan’s external partners, notably those who claim to have an interest in the country’s stability. In the past decade, Pakistan has lived with the fallout of a systematic dismantling of a carefully built civil service structure, when General Pervez Musharraf, the former president, chose to take the country for a ride in the name of devolution of the government.

In his determination to seek popularity for his military rule, the former general ignored calls for a review of his plan. For Musharraf, the key consideration was only to build popularity for the regime which was established through a coup in 1999. At the time, Musharraf’s devolution plan was warmly welcomed by key external players who believed that Pakistan could see a transformation for the better.

Years later, Pakistan’s increasing internal disarray and disorder must serve as an eye opener. Any attempt to restructure Pakistan as a country, without tackling the crisis at the centre of the challenge, will simply not work. A government run by leaders whose legacy of corruption has left them devoid of moral authority is just not going to succeed in lifting Pakistan’s worsening prospects.

Farhan Bokhari is a Pakistan-based commentator who writes on political and economic matters.

Source: Gulf News

May 13, 2012
By:Raoof Hasan

Justice Asif Saeed Khosa’s note to the detailed judgement on Mr. Gilani’s contempt of court case comes by way of an anguished exhortation in a legal matter. Running the risk of being labelled partisan, the learned judge could not curb a poetic expression of dismay at the lack of character that the nation continues to exhibit in dismantling the despotic mindset residing in the echelons of power.

From amongst a vast repertoire of failings, the two lines that best reflect the state of our society are “pity the nation whose leaders see no shame in crime” and “pity the nation that punishes its weak and poor but is shy of bringing its high and mighty to book”. No prescription could be written more succinctly or more effectively!

Of all the ills that plague this country, the lack of self-respect and courage of its people is by far the most intriguing. Instead of rebelling against their deprivations, joining hands in initiating a struggle towards genuine emancipation and freeing themselves from the clutches of captivity, they remain woefully self-focussed in their bid for a few miserly morsels. Tragically, we are inexorably inching towards the other extreme: that of glorifying crime and all its attendant manifestations. The instances of proven convicts being given prime-time media space for airing their convoluted defence are simply mind-boggling and reflect the regressive symptoms that have besieged the conscience of the nation. Its most depraved display is that of Mr. Gilani insisting on remaining the ‘prime minister’ in spite of having lost all moral and, according to many, even constitutional legitimacy and nonchalantly taking off for the UK, accompanied by a coterie of over seventy sycophants boring a huge dent in the national exchequer, to engage their leadership in a strategic dialogue that may impact the future of the country. Nothing could be more demeaning, casting a slur on the basic principles signifying human dignity, but the conscience of the nation remains besieged. Without doubt, Khalil Gibran was right: “Pity the nation that raises not its voice / save when it walks in funeral / boasts not except among its ruins / and will rebel not save when its neck is laid / between the sword and the block”.

While regression can be generally traced to lack of education and enlightenment and to the militant indoctrination doled out by a spate of madrassas sprouting all over, its presence should pave the way for initiating urgent remedial steps. That would not work to the benefit of the ruling mafias who prosper only by perpetuating the domain of darkness and whose survival will be endangered when faced with even a flickering ray of light to free the enslaved and the down-trodden. So, the nation stands condemned perpetually to suffer the dungeons of darkness with each generation giving way to the next that is even more inclined to obscurantism and militancy and given more to the sway of evil. The path of salvation lies eternally blocked. Sufferance is a way of living. So accustomed have the people become to this painful confinement that even the thought of freedom is scoffed at.

The self-anointed leadership of the PPP and the band of its cronies, suffering incessantly from a deeply-ingrained persecution complex, never tire of parroting the sacrifices they have rendered in the name of ‘democracy’. The last of the endless chain ended in the proclamation of the notorious NRO that remains, by far, the most devious mechanism ever employed to legitimise crime and corruption. The allied and not-so-allied leaderships in the provinces remain busy in their own loot and plunder in the name of service to the people as the country continues to plunge irretrievably into anarchy and mayhem. But the nation’s conscience remains besieged.

As an aftermath of a judgement that, in spite of intense provocation and grave insults hurled at their impartiality, the honourable judges succeeded in keeping within the defined parameters of the constitution, the nation stands effectively split. A thin belt in Sindh stands with the PPP, a noisy few are understandably supporting the opposition’s stance in asking Mr. Gilani to go home, but, regrettably, a vast majority remains aloof and totally unconcerned with the goings-on either because of their own more pressing existential issues, or because they have lost faith in the entire spectrum of political leadership on display. They are totally de-motivated.

But, can their continued silence be a remedy to curing the demonisation that the country is afflicted with as also their own future? That’s not the way it happens and that’s not the way it is going to happen. So the challenge before the few who are still interested in putting this country back on the rails and guiding its people to refuse the venomous doses of regression that they are being continually fed is to get their motivation back and to bring them centre-stage as the main cast in the unfolding drama we call Pakistan. Unless people claim ownership of their destinies and move to initiate a movement to end their enslavement, the forces of the status quo would continue to tighten the stranglehold to curb the voices of dissent. The brave may be few to begin with, but they come bearing a message of hope. The problem is that they may cast the first stones to dismantle the corrupt edifice, but they cannot succeed unless joined in by every single citizen who comes inspired with the dream of change leading to freedom from the yoke of slavery wrongfully dubbed as ‘democracy’. In reality, it is nothing more than a crude exploitation of the decadent instruments that perpetuate the hold of a few over the rest.

The writer is a political analyst and a member of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf. He can be reached at raoofhasan@hotmail.com
-Pakistan Today

Nasim Ahmed


With its Taxila public meeting the PML-N has launched its promised nationwide protest movement for the ouster of Prime Minister Gillani. Addressing a large crowd of supporters, Mian Nawaz Sharif said Gillani was a convicted man who had forfeited his constitutional, legal and moral right to continue as prime minister. He charged that the Zardari-Gilani duo was indulging in massive corruption and the time has come to oust them from power. He said that the PML-N was struggling for democracy and supremacy of law and the constitution and people should support the party in its struggle.

On May 06, the PTI chief Imran Khan put up his promised tsunami show against the government in Islamabad and gave a call to the country's youth to support him in rescuing Pakistan from the clutches of corrupt rulers. He said that if convicted PM Gillani won't step down in compliance with the Supreme Court order, PTI would organize the largest march in the history of Pakistan. He said an independent judiciary was essential to a true democratic order and realizing the vision of a new Pakistan and the PTI will spare no effort to achieve the goal.

From the mood of the leadership of the PML-N and the PTI, it is clear that they are serious in launching and sustaining a movement against the PPP government until its ouster from power. They have calculated that time was never more propitious to start a concerted move to topple an unpopular government. The masses are disillusioned and disgruntled, while the sword of disqualification is hanging over its PM. The government was never more vulnerable and it is time to strike hard.

According to media reports, the PML-N has already strategized its various options in order to gradually increase pressure on Gillani's government. These include protests inside Parliament, street demonstrations and linkages with other stake-holders, including the PPP allies, to force Gillani out of office. Other proposed measures include withdrawal of protocol from the prime minister during his Punjab visit and tabling a resolution against Gillani in the provincial assembly. The ultimate weapon will be a Long March to Islamabad to paralyse the working of the government.

But the opposition movement now starting has some negative aspects as well. Although, both the PML-N and the PTI are out in the streets against the government and they are working towards the same goal, there is no coordination between them. Imran Khan, who has no love lost for the PML-N and is continually attacking it for its soft policy towards the government, has set the condition that it must quit the Assembly if it wants to join hands with the PTI.

The PML-N has not so far responded, but it is obvious that for the moment the PTI's conditions are not acceptable to it. However, it has other allies to turn to and they include Jamaat-e-Islami, various religious groups, different factions of the Muslim League and independents. Reportedly, contacts have also been established with the JUI-F's, Maulana Fazlur Rahman, and some Sindhi politicians disillusioned with the policies and performance of the PPP government.

It seems that the PML-N has now learned from its previous policy of not taking on board potential allies and decided not to go it alone this time. The party has also contacted members of the PPP old guard like Naheed Khan and an assorted group of independents not happy with the PPP style of governance and its running battle against the judiciary.

The objective behind these political moves is not only to pave the ground for the success of the proposed Long March, but also to exercise the option of moving a no-confidence motion against the government in the National Assembly which will finally erase the sobriquet of "friendly opposition'' slapped on the party by its critics, including Imran Khan.

It has been reported that while carrying on its anti-Gillani agitation, the PML-N will propose four options to the government to resolve the crisis: Ask for the resignation of its premier; dissolve the assemblies; establish a caretaker set-up and announce the date for general elections. But the indications so far are that the PPP high command is in no mood to make any concessions and will prefer political martyrdom rather than surrender in the face of opposition pressure when the elections are not far.

If nothing works, the PML-N may also create a constitutional deadlock in the country by having the provincial government lock horns with the PPP at the centre. With all official transactions between the Centre and the province suspended, the business of state will come to a halt, necessitating the intervention of a third force to separate the feuding parties and broker a solution.

Observers of the national scene are of the view that if no party gives way and a gridlock results we may see a repeat of the Kakar formula to resolve the crisis. Let us see what is in store for us in the days ahead.

-Cuttingedge

By Khaled Ahmed
Published: May 12, 2012

The writer is Director South Asian Media School, Lahore khaled.ahmed@tribune.com.pk

Pakistani nationalism, like all nationalisms, is based on what Ibn Khaldun called asabiya or the ‘group feeling’ that people living inside a state must possess. It is used by the state to create unity, solidarity and patriotism, which must result in a national effort to create prosperity and good life.

But each nationalism has some exceptional aspects, or so the nations feel. To create internal unity, states may use the threat of an external enemy or even create an external enemy if it is not present. An ideology may also be created to cement the otherwise clashing identities inside the state. Ideologies are usually coercive unless subjected to a paradoxical experiment: encouragement of diversity to create stakes for all identities in the preservation of the state.
Pakistani nationalism has two exceptional aspects, both aimed at creating internal unity and cohesion: fear of India as ‘external enemy’, and religion. And both tend to be coercive. This affects the quality of the ‘social contract’ behind the legitimacy of the state by rendering it partly non-voluntary.

The India-centred nationalism was fashioned early in Pakistan’s history by a political elite that had relocated to Karachi from India. The wars with India that followed spread it to the national elite dominated numerically by Punjab. Because of the wars, the Pakistan Army was given an aura based on ‘national gratitude’ for the soldier. Like all nation-states, the state of Pakistan attached its display of nationalism to the Pakistan Army.

The Pakistan Army today is repository of Pakistani nationalism. It dominates all the institutions of the state and has taken longer to effect an internal reconsideration of its India-centred nationalism than the civilian political elite. The textbook is on its side and not on the side of the intellectually more supple political leadership.

Anatol Lieven in his book Pakistan: A Hard Country (Allen Lane 2011) thinks a dominant Pakistan Army, like of that of Kemal Ataturk, could have used nationalism to create a modern state. But the nationalism it has espoused — positing victory over an undefeatable India — can only cause it to damage Pakistan further. He writes:

“The US and international response to the Kargil adventure of 1999 and to the Mumbai terrorist attack of 2008 should have demonstrated to Pakistan that, quite apart from India’s own strength, the international community will not tolerate Pakistani attacks on another nuclear-armed power … Thus, while the Pakistani military can maintain the existence of Pakistan, it is not nearly strong enough to transform the country into a successful modern state” (p.66).

His final verdict goes like this: “The nationalism on which the military relies to maintain its own morale and discipline serves to draw the country into dangerous international rivalries and equally dangerous entanglements with extremist groups such as the Afghan Taliban and the Lashkar-e-Taiba. If there were to be another successful terrorist attack on the United States by a Pakistan-based terrorist group, US retaliation could threaten Pakistan and its army with destruction” (p.67).

The civilian ruling elite in Pakistan is innovative about the dysfunctional India-centric aspects of nationalism, but it is not able to interfere in the gradually hardening gloss of the religious ideology of the state. Neither they nor the Pakistan Army can prevent the ideological leadership of the state from passing to the Taliban and al Qaeda. The Pakistan Army’s adoption of the doctrine of jihad and its creation of non-state jihadi warriors under this doctrine has permitted more centres of power than the state can sustain.

Fear of the Pakistan Army once informed the thinking of civilian institutions; now fear of the nonstate actor trumps that fear and lowers the Pakistan Army’s stature.

-The Express Tribune

May 17, 2012
Khurram Husain

NOW I’ve heard everything. When the power situation hit the high water mark one more time, the government rolled out another one of its horse and cattle shows, complete with ‘briefings’ from the ministries and ‘proposals’ from the bureaucracy.

A two-day long, full court affair in the capital, in which ministers from Petroleum and Water and Power and Finance all sat around a table in the presidency, concluded on Tuesday on a note that probably none of them came prepared for.

Unless the presidential spokesman, the venerable Senator Farhatullah Babar has been misquoted, it went something like this.

They will set up a ‘control room’ in the Ministry of Water and Power, from where they will be able to personally monitor the generation of electricity at power plants around the country, its transmission to the distribution companies, and those areas where loadshedding is being carried out.

And the best part: the ‘control room’ will have its counterpart in the presidency, so the president himself will be able to see how much electricity is being produced, who’s getting it and who isn’t.

Don’t bother asking what they will do with this information. Somebody up there actually thinks that the distribution of electricity is something like the distribution of sacrificial meat amongst the poor. ‘Give him some, that one over there, he’s been waiting for a long time. No, not this one here, he’s had some already and keeps coming back for more. That one over there, he’s pushing and shoving too much! Tell him to stop otherwise he’ll get none!’

It’s a landlord’s way of managing scarcity, if you think about it. If you want to understand how this government is going about managing the energy crisis, just look at how irrigation water is managed and you’ll get the perfect metaphor.

The large landlord will own the choicest land right next to the canal headworks. When the water is released he will take all that he needs and then some, and whatever is left can flow downstream until it reaches the poor ‘tail-enders’ who will then fight for the trickle that is left for them.

Something very similar happens in the management of all public goods in the agriculture sector.

Whenever wheat procurement gets under way, for instance, the big guy will get the red carpet treatment while the little guy gets the bureaucratic run-around at the procurement centre. Or with fertiliser, where the distribution of imported fertiliser, which is entirely government-owned, has been handed over to a couple of political families who decide who gets how much and who is left out in the cold.

In short, a privileged strata gets priority access to the public goods owned by the government, and only when their needs, and the needs of those connected with them, have been met will the rest of us get what’s left.

Now something similar is being done with electricity. The recently concluded meeting was preceded by April’s ‘energy conference’, the third such conference held by this government in four years.

The big agreement to come out of that conference was that the burden of loadshedding will be borne equitably by all the provinces. It’s hard to claim that that commitment has been upheld.

And before that, in October, another such full-day affair had ended with a commitment that there will be “no more sacred cows in the matter of bill recoveries”.

Between November and February, an effort of sorts was indeed launched to get outstanding bills recovered, during which a list was presented to the National Assembly of the big parties who had large outstanding electricity dues — a very long list
consisting mostly of government offices.

So this time around, did the assembled delegates of the meeting make any attempt to tally up their successes in the previous commitments? No. In fact, the question of aggressively going after defaulters didn’t even arise this time, nor did the question of
determining and measuring provincial entitlements to electricity.

In fact, the only thing the presidential spokesman felt comfortable talking about after the meeting was the rather bizarre proposal for the president and the minister of water and power to personally monitor the allocation of electricity around the
country.

What’s clear is this: the government is no longer even pretending to resolve the issues in the power sector. At least the earlier such gatherings made some of the right noises afterwards. This time the only concrete suggestion to come out of the whole affair
is one that expands the sway of arbitrary authority in crucial power-sector decisions.

If the government is at all serious about this proposal to build a ‘control room’ to monitor the generation and distribution of electricity across the country, and we see real work take place to actually install such a facility in the presidency, then we will know beyond a shadow of a doubt that politics has triumphed over policy.

The management of scarce public goods reveals a great deal about whether or not a given dispensation is capable of addressing the challenges facing the country.

In some cases, growing scarcities prompt reforms that seek to increase supply and encourage judicious use of a dwindling public good. But in the case of Pakistan, scarcities in public goods have been managed by creating a steeply hierarchical
entitlement regime, then using those hierarchies to trade loyalty for access.

If you have cultivated the right kinds of links with the right networks over time, you will have privileged access to irrigation water or bank credit or natural gas or any other public good.

Now it looks increasingly as if this is what the government is moving to entrench in the power sector: a hierarchical entitlement regime rather than reforms that aim to increase efficiencies and promote investment.

The writer is a Karachi-based journalist covering business and economic policy.

Twitter: @khurramhusain

khurram.husain@gmail.com
-Dawn

May 17, 2012
Ikram Sehgal

Erstwhile phone buddies Husain Haqqani and Mansoor Ijaz have amply proven each other to be dubious characters, and such people have a recurring habit of falling out. The truth about Memogate’s sponsors notwithstanding, the motivation was primarily to bring the Pakistani security establishment to heel, the ultimate goal being to “de-nuke” Pakistan. Mansoor Ijaz being an American-born US citizen was safe promoting stated US policy. What was Pakistan’s ambassador to the US, His Excellency Husain Haqqani, up to? The Supreme Court did the right thing appointing a really high-powered Judicial Commission (chief justices of three provincial high courts) to sift fact from fiction.

Mansoor Ijaz scored big by giving his BlackBerry PIN number to the Judicial Commission and offering to hand over his BlackBerry and all related data. Husain Haqqani seemed to suffer from “memory loss” about where his device was, saying it was somewhere in his home in Washington DC. He later obfuscated, initially flatly declining to have his BlackBerry data investigated, then allowing limited access. The government (and his buddies in the media) faithfully parroted Haqqani’s defence about the memo being fake.

Mansoor Ijaz went one better by presenting additional forensic evidence in London on May 10 to experts engaged by the Judicial Commission. The eight-hour examination of his computer and BlackBerry handsets by forensic experts verified and validated each and every word of all BBM chat exchanges, e-mails, SMS messages and the telephone calls exchanged between him and Husain Haqqani. Many deleted messages were also recovered in the process. Haqqani and his lawyers boycotted the proceedings on the grounds that the examination should have been conducted earlier during the cross-examination of Mansoor Ijaz.

Husain Haqqani started his political career as president of the extremely militant Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba, the student wing of the Jamaat-e-Islami. A far-right Islamist political party, the Jamaat advocates religious fundamentalism and a theocracy-based government system in Pakistan. The MQM then not being in existence, the Jamaat virtually ruled Karachi. Haqqani’s academic brilliance was recognised by Ziaul Haq’s martial law regime, which assiduously promoted his career as a journalist.

After Zia’s death he started working for the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), created by Zia’s military and civilian supporters to counter Benazir Bhutto’s resurgent Pakistan Peoples Party. A past master at giving spin to facts, he excelled himself serving the PML-N. His “dirty tricks” were too much for then political neophyte Mian Nawaz Sharif to stomach, so Haqqani fell out with the PML-N to join its ideological opposite, the PPP. Reincarnated as a liberal, Haqqani spewed poison against his former rightist mentors.

The Supreme Court was naive in generously allowing him to leave the country during the Memogate hearings despite being repeatedly advised that he would never come back. Not surprisingly, Haqqani, who never fails to eventually maul whoever helps him, has now turned his guns on those honourable judges. His latest article “How Pakistan lets terrorism fester, why Pakistani courts are biased?” is a shameful attempt at maligning the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

Lashing out at the intelligence agencies, he does not spare the media either, “While fighting Pakistan’s endemic corruption is vital, the media and judiciary have helped redirect attention away from the threat of jihadist ideology by constantly targeting the governing party – a convenient situation for the intelligence services, which would prefer to keep the spotlight on the civilian government rather than on the militant groups they have historically supported.”

Ahmad Noorani unmasked Haqqani’s real face in his excellent rejoinder on May 14: “In his true colours: why is sacked ambassador shy of the truth?” “He (Haqqani) says our national discourse has been hijacked by those seeking to deflect attention from militant Islamic extremism and Gen Zia and Musharraf were mainly responsible. What a marvel of a statement if he had only looked at his own career and growth. Was he himself not an Islamist militant student leader? Did Gen Zia not promote him as a journalist in the Far Eastern Economic Review? Was he not advising the dictator, free of cost or for whatever returns. He forgot to admit that he was a member of Team Zia, which played havoc with this country.

This scribe has a state-run TV’s video showing Haqqani weeping at the time of the death of his mentor Ziaul Haq. Haqqani accuses the Supreme Court judges of carrying out their ‘own partisan agenda.’ What he calls an agenda is actually the blowback of his own party government’s massive corruption, loot and plunder, which Mr Haqqani conveniently refuses to see.

The PPP leaders have all along shouted from housetops that in 11 years nothing was proved against them. Now that the courts are proving charges of corruption, judges have become biased and carrying agendas! Is there any limit to the depth of shamelessness that Mr Haqqani and his bosses will stop at?”

Noorani adds: “Haqqani says the Pakistani media has done little to help generate support for eliminating extremism and fighting terrorism. What the media has done for him, he will never talk about. Can he tell us how many hundreds or thousands of calls he has made to each and every media person to push his point of view? How many fake websites he and his cronies, getting funds from one secret fund or other, have been running to malign his opponents and promote him as a victim and as a hero?

How many fake names has he been using to respond to legal and criminal questions that he was supposed to answer but ran away? Haqqani’s cronies in the print and electronic media are ready to do his bidding “as and when required.” Coordinated disinformation by media celebrities never ceases to amaze. His “media network” outdid itself doing an about-turn justifying Haqqani’s excuses to avoid appearing before the Memogate Commission in person in Pakistan.

Haqqani got away with disparaging the country’s institutions while officially being its ambassador. There is “nothing official” anymore about his venom, or hidden. Americans can sometimes be very naive, but they will never fully trust a man who does not show patriotism for his country, at least while he still claims to be a Pakistani citizen. Having the power of the pen, tarnishing reputations comes naturally to Haqqani, Blogs planted by his minions proliferate. He should remember everyone does not play by the “Marques of Queensbury rules” that others have to adhere to.

Even before the Memogate case came to light, I had said: “For Pakistan’s sake we should first dismantle the far more dangerous ‘Haqqani network’ in Washington DC.”

The writer is a defence and political analyst. Email: isehgal@pathfinder9.com
-The News